baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
whoever's in 10 Downing St. BBC prob wouldn't have said something like this before 2016 - it's totally malleable. far right government, far right state media.
 

luka

Well-known member
When trump came to power it was suggested that this was indicative of a war in heaven and I think that is right. There is a war in heaven and its ongoing.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
It might be good vs evil if lots of the people on the good side weren't so awful. This is a world where Emmanuel Macron is emerging as a hero of the free world. Dark shit. Though I suppose war is always like this.
 
Last edited:

DannyL

Wild Horses
I feel kinda numbed by this in part 'cos I'd been expecting it. I watched this last night, it's long but worth persisting with even if he's quite annoying - and it's added to the numbness by positing that this is the new normal - populism is here to stay 'cos people's lives are gonna be a bit shit for the long term. Even shitter if you're non-white, an immigrant, queer or whatever.

 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Perhaps one of the most frustrating aspects of all this is that, just from Twitter and Facebook, I get the impression that many people who voted Leave three years ago are, dimly and belatedly, realising they've been lied to and sold an absolute turkey, and that their lives are almost certainly going to get harder and not easier, but this is not significantly reducing public enthusiasm for Brexit, or even a no-deal Brexit. Admittedly I have seen a few people with the integrity to say "This isn't what I voted for, I made a mistake" and that they'd vote Remain in a second referendum, but much more often I find that telling a Brexiteer that the Leave campaigns lied to them will result in a "So what?" rather than a "No they didn't".

So in fact these people are vaguely aware of what's going on, but are simply too proud to admit they've made a mistake. Or they've given up looking forward to those sunlit uplands and simply want more hardship and adversity - the Ballardian death drive rearing its ugly head - which ties into the idea that a lot of it is about nostalgia for a war they never experienced, and makes a bit of a mockery of the idea that it was in any way an "anti-austerity" vote, even if it did have Cameron and Osborne on the other side of it.
 
Last edited:

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
When I was in Exmoor a few weeks ago I felt I got an inkling of how distant and alien even *London* must feel to people out in the countryside. They don't even want people from London "telling them what to do". Let alone brussels bureaucrats (PS I know this is unfair I'm sure there are many remainers living in rural areas.)
 

version

Well-known member
When I was in Exmoor a few weeks ago I felt I got an inkling of how distant and alien even *London* must feel to people out in the countryside. They don't even want people from London "telling them what to do". Let alone brussels bureaucrats (PS I know this is unfair I'm sure there are many remainers living in rural areas.)

Is that a relatively recent thing or do you think it's always been there?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Well that already happened in 2016 - Leave campaign broke every rule going. I think that however bad this is, it is a logical consequence of sleepwalking into disaster since 2008/2010 and not a sudden change.
I think that this is slightly different. In 2016 the Leave campaign cheated and it was proven to have cheated but it was May and the government who decided that they must still follow the result and basically let them off. With hindsight this was an utterly terrible mistake, both cos (obviously) Brexit is a terrible idea that can't be executed properly, but also cos it gave people the idea that the rules even at that level basically won't be enforced and they can ignore them if they want.
What's different now is that Johnson and Trump both break the rules and then let themselves off. They ignore the conventions and it turns out that the things in place that were supposed to prevent that are toothless. Trump can declare a state of emergency for no reason, BJ can ignore a vote of no confidence and so on. It's terrifying but it makes clear that the checks and balances to maintain democracy basically only work if the President/Prime Minister isn't an utter cunt. Now they are and it's broken down.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Hugh Grant doesn't seem too pleased about it either

"You will not fuck with my children’s future. You will not destroy the freedoms my grandfather fought two world wars to defend. Fuck off you over-promoted rubber bath toy. Britain is revolted by you and you little gang of masturbatory prefects."
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Is that a relatively recent thing or do you think it's always been there?

Probably always been there to an extent but it's reached a real head in the last few years. I think *the* ideological success story of the past decade, here and in the USA and probably elsewhere (but most obviously with the Trump/Brexit phenomenon) is pseudo-anti-elitism, if I can coin a term as ugly as that. A huge number of people, mostly conservative but with a depressing contingent of useful idiots on the left, have fallen for the idea that anyone who lives in London and reads the Guardian is part of some amorphous "elite", and that the antidote to this terrible thing comes in the form of a programme led by multimillionaire stockbrokers and aristocrats, many of them with dodgy business ties to a brutal quasi-dictator. Or, as the Daily Mash put it recently, "Working-class man thinks someone called 'Annunziata Rees-Mogg' is on his side."
 

version

Well-known member
They're writing Ed Miliband fan fiction on Reddit:

London, 2014

A dark-haired man dressed in a smart business suit sits at a cafe table, reaching down to take a bite out of his bacon sandwich. A few steps away, a cameraman takes aim.

Time stops and a thunderclap sounds from the air. A man in a white suit of armour, wild-eyed and fevered, drops to the ground from midair and dashes toward the table as if the world depends on it. He reaches the table and grabs the sandwich from the man's hand, hurling it away in a shower of bread and meat. The man and the cameraman remain seated, too shocked to react.

"What are you doing, who are you?" the ex-sandwich-eater demands.

The white-clad traveller doesn't reply, merely drops to his knees in relief, sobbing as he slowly dissolves into the air.
 

droid

Well-known member
EC9-r2pWkAAZxcr
 

version

Well-known member
Fake news is 'reinforced by false memories' - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49435387

A study into false memories highlights the risks of "fake news" spreading via social media.

Volunteers were shown fabricated news reports in the week before Ireland's 2018 abortion law referendum. Nearly half of them subsequently claimed to have had prior memories of at least one of the made-up events detailed. And many failed to question their false recollections even after being told the articles they had read might be fake.

The 3,140 participants had been more likely to have created false memories if the reports had lied about the side they had opposed, the study added.

The peer-reviewed work supports prior research into the phenomenon. But its authors say it is the first time the problem has been tested in relation to a real-world referendum at the time it was being held. One of academics told BBC News it highlighted how difficult it could be to "undo" spurious memories once they had been created.

"Memory is a reconstructive process and we are vulnerable to suggestion distorting our recollections, without our conscious awareness," Dr Gillian Murphy, of University College Cork, said.

"The implications for any upcoming elections are that voters are vulnerable to not just believing a fake news story but falsely recalling that the [made-up] event truly happened."
 

comelately

Wild Horses
Buzzfeed Political Editor is a former member of Guido's youth squad who it appears is trying to actually forge a career as a vaguely neutral journalist, but he does seem quite well connected.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/boris-johnson-brexit-extreme-measures


Boris Johnson’s surprise move to ask the Queen to suspend Parliament for five weeks in the run-up to the Brexit deadline on Oct. 31 is just the opening salvo of a meticulously constructed Downing Street strategy to eat up time and head off attempts by rebel MPs to block a no-deal exit, BuzzFeed News can reveal.

The prorogation of Parliament was described as “profoundly undemocratic” by former chancellor Philip Hammond and a “constitutional outrage” by Commons speaker John Bercow on Wednesday. That rebel anger is certain to rise if Number 10 implements a series of extreme measures to force through Brexit on Halloween, as the prime minister has repeatedly promised.

BuzzFeed News has learned that in the last few days, Johnson’s senior team — led by his chief of staff Dominic Cummings and director of legislative affairs Nikki da Costa — has explored a number of increasingly controversial proposals it could deploy depending on the success of rebel attempts to thwart Brexit. The ideas under consideration include the following:

Attempting to disrupt a Commons debate on Northern Ireland power-sharing due on Sept. 9, a day which could be used by rebels to attempt to delay Brexit. It is described by Johnson allies as a “time bomb” set for them in the final weeks of Theresa May’s premiership.

Determining whether Johnson would be breaking the law by ignoring any successful rebel legislation or refusing to resign in the event he lost a vote of no confidence.

Using a variety of mechanisms, including a potential budget, to create new Commons debates and further reduce time for rebels to act.

Using the prorogation of Parliament to “kill the bill” by rebel MPs and force them to table it again after the Queen’s Speech on Oct. 14.

Creating new bank holidays to prevent the House of Commons from being recalled during the prorogation period.

Filibustering any bill by rebel MPs attempting to force Johnson to delay Brexit when it reaches the House of Lords.

Ennobling new pro-Brexit peers as a last resort to kill any such bill in the Lords.

Exploring what the consequences would be if Johnson advised the Queen not to give royal assent to any legislation passed by Parliament delaying Brexit.

The measures were devised by the prime minister’s senior aides who have spent the summer in their Downing Street bunker war-gaming how to respond to potential parliamentary manoeuvres by MPs determined to block no deal. The rebels, by contrast, spent the August holidays debating whether they would back Ken Clarke as a potential caretaker prime minister in an unlikely government of national unity.

Number 10's prorogation plan was ready to go and be put into action on Tuesday evening, just hours after Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn agreed to a pact with the so-called Remainer “rebel alliance” seeking to prevent a no-deal Brexit.

Downing Street’s official line is that it is not preventing MPs from debating Brexit policy, that it is routine for a new administration to hold a Queen’s Speech and for Parliament to be prorogued in the run-up, and that MPs will have sufficient time to scrutinise plans before and after the Commons is suspended.

But privately, Johnson allies admit their principal aim in the next two months is to reduce the number of days when MPs can act to stop no deal, in order to give the government the best-possible negotiating hand ahead of the European Council on Oct. 17, where it hopes to strike a new Brexit deal with the EU.

“Every sitting day, there is a risk of something going wrong,” a government source said.

One senior Brexiteer equated Downing Street’s strategy to a football team wasting time at the end of a match. “We are into the final 10 minutes, and we are holding the ball by the corner flag,” they said.

The decision announced by Johnson on Wednesday morning to hold a Queen’s Speech in October immediately reduces the number of parliamentary days available for rebel MPs to block no deal from 22 to 15, according to former Commons special adviser Chris White.

In reality it reduces the number by considerably more, as MPs would likely have voted to cancel the upcoming conference recess and now cannot.

The Queen’s Speech has the added benefit for the government of requiring four days of debate, during which the rebels cannot act.

Downing Street privately believes there will not be enough time between the Queen’s Speech and Oct. 31 for rebel MPs to delay Brexit either through the process of the vote of no confidence or by attempting to pass legislation. That means that in the days after the Queen’s Speech, Johnson hopes, Parliament is faced with a choice between a deal and no deal.

The government’s calculation has long been that the “moment of maximum danger” comes at a potential no-confidence vote. Number 10 officials said that pro-Remain MPs would now have to make the ultimate decision next week: call a no-confidence vote and risk "being checkmated immediately", or wait and see if Johnson can achieve a new Brexit deal.

Downing Street is bullish that it would win any such vote, but insists that if Johnson loses, he would refuse to resign, then call an election for after Brexit day, dissolve Parliament, and watch the UK fall out of the EU.

Ministers and aides have looked at the legal consequences for the prime minister of refusing to resign in the event he loses a confidence vote, whether he would be breaking the law, and what would happen if he did. But Downing Street insiders believe that any legal challenge to holding an election over the period when the UK leaves the EU would not be successful.

Other Johnson aides think they would be better off holding an election before Brexit day, on or around Oct. 17, arguing they had been forced into it by a Parliament determined to defy the referendum result.

Aside from a confidence vote, the rebel alliance hopes to thwart Johnson through a legislative route by seizing control of the Commons Order Paper and passing laws that would prevent the government from proroguing Parliament and require the prime minister to seek an extension of Article 50 from Brussels — a repeat of the strategy used by Dominic Grieve, Yvette Cooper, Nick Boles, and other MPs during May’s premiership. Number 10 fully expects Bercow to tear up the parliamentary rule book to help them do so.

Government aides are looking at ways to disrupt a debate on the Northern Ireland power-sharing arrangement due on Sept. 9, a day which could be used by rebel MPs to take control of the Order Paper and table legislation. The date was set in the final weeks of the May government and has been described by a government source as a “time bomb” left for Johnson by the previous administration.

One key impact of proroguing Parliament is the effect on existing bills. A motion to “carry over” a bill to the next session has to be moved by ministers; therefore, if a backbench bill to stop Johnson from proroguing, or mandating him to extend Article 50, has not passed Parliament by Sept. 9, it would be “killed” and would have to be tabled again after the Queen’s Speech, Whitehall sources said.

Government aides believe they would be able to use a variety of mechanisms to create Commons debates that would block out days for rebel MPs to table legislation. One possibility discussed is an emergency budget, which would not only help Johnson with voters in the event of an election but also produce days of debate in Parliament that essentially help wind down the clock.

They are also considering the controversial tactic of filibustering any rebel bill when it reaches the House of Lords. Whitehall sources said there are more opportunities for Brexiteers to frustrate the rebels in the Lords, where Bercow is not the referee. As a last resort, Johnson could even ennoble hundreds of new pro-Brexit peers to defeat any such bill.

In a sign of the extraordinary measures Downing Street is prepared to take to defeat the rebels, one proposal under consideration in Number 10 is to create bank holidays to prevent Parliament from being recalled while it is prorogued.

An amendment tabled by rebel-in-chief Grieve theoretically forces Parliament to sit if the government attempts to force through no deal via prorogation. But the amendment states that Parliament would not have to sit on a bank holiday. Parliamentary expert Joe Armitage says the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 stipulates that the government could ask the Queen to create a new bank holiday — or even a local bank holiday in an unpopulated area of the UK — that would thereby prevent Parliament from sitting. This proposal was looked at by Downing Street.

Whoever wins out in the battle between Johnson and the rebel alliance over the next two months comes down to, many in government believe, the ability of each side to remain united and pursue their respective goals. One Whitehall aide said they believed the sense of purpose in Downing Street, and the absolute determination it has to leave the EU, is stronger than the delicate grouping of rebels made up of opposition parties and backbench Tory MPs.

“Can they have consistency? Can they have everyone on the same page repeatedly, every day for the next two months?” the aide said.

Government sources point to a statement Dominic Cummings made to special advisers when he took charge of Number 10, that he was prepared to secure Brexit on Oct. 31 “by any means necessary”.

A Whitehall source said: “This is the biggest parliamentary showdown since the Civil War. It will come down to who is cleverer: Dom and Nikki or John Bercow and Dominic Grieve”.
 

version

Well-known member
Apparently the ERG have said that they'll vote down any deal offered and Farage has said that anything other than no deal isn't Brexit so I don't know what this talk of Boris having the option of coming up with another deal is about.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
As just head of a caretaker government?

I think why this is so worrying is it's the first (of no doubt many more) deliberate and calculated flouting of conventions. It feels like the beginnings of autocratic rule.
 
Top